Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider
registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

Yeah, Roger said that they tracked Patty for 3.5 miles before losing her sign on pine needles. That would be a slow process to follow whatever sign was being left and might require dismounting numerous times or even doing the whole tracking event on foot while pulling your horse.

Maybe that lie was supposed to tie in with another lie told about Gimlin being a tracker with Indian ancestry. But then that partnership fell apart and the story didn't work out. The rather monumental tracking excursion bit got dumped from the already-inconsistent narrative. The timeline given doesn't even allow for the hours it would have taken to do the tracking trip and then still do everything else.

Gimlin doesn't talk about the tracking and people who question him at lectures seem to know to avoid that subject. The bent stirrup lie is avoided as well.

__________________Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

And as that's contradiction's long running corollary, one can't bend a stirrup by his horse falling on him. As in it being essentially a physical impossibility. Of course in theory metal stirrups could bend, but in 1968 they weren't using metal stirrups on their western saddles, they had already bent wood (of all things) stirrups. A closer look at any of the clear video of P & G on their horses should show what stirrups they used. Those wood stirrups are basically bullet proof. A fully shod 1,500# horse could bounce up and down on just one of them with all four hooves at once and probably never affect it.

Proving your point, it's just a stupid detail RP made up that he thought gave it credibility (i.e. why would they say a stirrup bent if it didn't actually happen and who would really question it if it didn't) that he could never take back. Gimlin was right, there was no horse rearing or falling or bending going on, but their story had to have some kind of unique, definitive detail and Bob definitely wasn't hired on as creative director.

So what bent stirrup was Patterson showing to people then? Patterson was even limping, apparently. What was Patterson's prop stirrup?

Roger is fooling people, so he grabs a cheap metal stirrup from a rocking horse, bends it, and carries it around with him to show the "RUBES" the evidence of the horse falling on him. He would never show that to a real outdoor person, because they'd laugh at him.

__________________"I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker
"I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325
Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic

Most riders use stirrups they like, and have owned for years, just like their boots. Roger may have been using stirrups he’d had forever, or he may have even made his own.
Or, since he was using Bob’s horse he may have bent Bob’s stirrup, which sounds like something he would do.

He would never show that to a real outdoor person, because they'd laugh at him.

A "real outdoor person" wouldn't laugh if that person was already a Bigfoot believer. Patterson understood the psychology of Bigfooters and so he only associated with them. Gimlin still does the same thing.

__________________Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

A "real outdoor person" wouldn't laugh if that person was already a Bigfoot believer. Patterson understood the psychology of Bigfooters and so he only associated with them. Gimlin still does the same thing.

A real outdoor person, wouldn't be a Bigfoot believer. They might be part of the hoax, but for my point, a 'real outdoor person' doesn't include Bigfoot Believers.

__________________"I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker
"I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325
Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic

So what bent stirrup was Patterson showing to people then? Patterson was even limping, apparently. What was Patterson's prop stirrup?

It's funny, I laugh at the board sometimes when people debate endlessly (or it just feels like that) about the tiniest of (mostly inconsequential) details of something and now I seem to be right in there doing just that. I apologize.

So anyway, with no picture of him doing it we don't know that he showed anyone anything stirrup-wise, it just says he did. Even if he did show somebody something, who knows what it was from. And he could be limping from the horse falling on him in general, independent of his foot. Or his wife coulda kicked him in the balls the night before.

It's true that bendable metal stirrups do exist and they even make a metal stirrup called a bent stirrup. That they're also called 'stirrups' is their only relation to this though. My contention is (and has been) that considering the kind of saddles they were inevitably using, western saddles, they had stirrups that can't actually be re-bent (and stay re-bent) once they're initially created (as bent wood). They would break long before deforming permanently. Akin to trying to reduce the size of your kitchen sink by squeezing it real hard. That is to say there's ALWAYS been a huge missing piece in this puzzle and it's exactly what you think it is, the so-called bent stirrup. It's because it doesn't exist, just like the beast.

Originally Posted by Drewbot

How about this?

Roger is fooling people, so he grabs a cheap metal stirrup from a rocking horse, bends it, and carries it around with him to show the "RUBES" the evidence of the horse falling on him. He would never show that to a real outdoor person, because they'd laugh at him.

And even potentially true, but again the idea he'd somehow be using metal stirrups on their saddles in the manner they ride makes no sense whatsoever. Equivalent to the notion of deliberately putting street tires on a motorcycle for use off-roading. Metal stirrups would be dumb (low bearing surface area), and in 1968 especially, quite antithetical to their being self described cowboys who use western saddles.

So anyway, with no picture of him doing it we don't know that he showed anyone anything stirrup-wise, it just says he did. Even if he did show somebody something, who knows what it was from...

He showed the bent stirrup to Al Hodgson and Syl McCoy. Hodgson would go on to recall and talk about it without ever asking, "what stirrup are you talking about, Roger never showed me a bent stirrup".

I think that Patterson purposely bent a stirrup to show local Bigfooters right after the claimed filming. It certainly didn't have to come from the actual saddle that he had been using - that was still back at Bluff Creek with the horses. I don't know if Patterson did go on to show others the stirrup or brought it to lectures and the film roadshow.

__________________Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

So the horse tumbles over (and is this little Peanuts we're talking about here?) and presumably lands on its side, trapping the stirrup beneath . . . its ribs? The stirrup bends but no mention of cracked ribs for the horse?

So the horse tumbles over (and is this little Peanuts we're talking about here?) and presumably lands on its side, trapping the stirrup beneath . . . its ribs? The stirrup bends but no mention of cracked ribs for the horse?

Exactly! In addition to western saddles not even possessing the necessary elements, the practical application of the forces required to bend any kind of in-use saddle stirrup makes the premise of his horse falling on him and "bending" one completely absurd. The actual forces needed would kill both horse and rider long before any stirrup bending occurs. Which shouldn't really be a surprise considering Patterson is a literal king of absurd premises.

So the horse tumbles over (and is this little Peanuts we're talking about here?) and presumably lands on its side, trapping the stirrup beneath . . . its ribs? The stirrup bends but no mention of cracked ribs for the horse?

I'm sure old timers here have seen this interview, Green questioning Gimlin, but for any newbies, Gimlin changes up the storyline a bit -- Patterson's horse didn't take a fall:

The stirrup story just got a lot worse (even if he did fall), he was mounted on sheep. Gimlin: "...this wasn't a full size horse Roger was riding either. It was a pony, a small horse." Green replies: "Yeah I've seen those little horses, he used to haul them in a Volkswagen bus." Amateur stirrup bending isn't a game for little horses.

It wouldn't be totally unprecedented. IIRC, Wyoming declared the jackalope to be its official "mythical beast".

There is considerably more evidence for the existence of jackalopes than there is for bigfeets. Damn near every bar or touristy restaurant in the state has the head of one mounted on the wall.

My ex-wife, a graduate from Yale no less, once took a trip out west and proudly brought back a jackalope postcard and told me she had viewed a stuffed jackalope at a gas station. She knew I would be excited since I was interested in cryptids. I replied by starting off with a snarky "You're a graduate of Yale, right?, and you think ....."

My ex-wife, a graduate from Yale no less, once took a trip out west and proudly brought back a jackalope postcard and told me she had viewed a stuffed jackalope at a gas station. She knew I would be excited since I was interested in cryptids. I replied by starting off with a snarky "You're a graduate of Yale, right?, and you think ....."

The Bigfoot version.....you graduated from grade school right?, and you think there's a giant monkey man roaming the U.S.?

My ex-wife, a graduate from Yale no less, once took a trip out west and proudly brought back a jackalope postcard and told me she had viewed a stuffed jackalope at a gas station. She knew I would be excited since I was interested in cryptids. I replied by starting off with a snarky "You're a graduate of Yale, right?, and you think ....."

Well, I think the rule for jackalopes is that none of the locals seriously believe they are real, but it is perfectly acceptable to try to convince gullible tourists that they are real.

Well, I think the rule for jackalopes is that none of the locals seriously believe they are real, but it is perfectly acceptable to try to convince gullible tourists that they are real.

That is the rule for any folk-story.

Snipe hunt being the base-line. Gullible scouts go to summer camp for the first time, older scouts and adults convince the younger ones that the Snipe is a real creature, even to the point of getting the younger ones to carry a paper bag around to look for it.

Locals in Petoskey area of Michigan would tell people to beware of cougars in the area all the way back to the 70's, despite the complete lack of cougars in lower Michigan at that time.

Likewise in Petoskey area, locals would tell of Native Americans still living in the woods, bending trees. They even knew where to go to show you where the bent trees were.

Rochester Michigan in the 70's, at that time, it was suburb still being carved out of the woods, anyone who lived near the woods would try to convince the city folk that they could see Bigfoot walking along the edge of the tree line. First hand account of locals making fake bigfoot tracks in the woods.

__________________"I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker
"I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325
Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic

Does anyone remember the link or article that broke down the Patterson tracks starting with the Shipton Print, talking about how Krantz made it into the Sasquatch, and Roger Patterson took it from there.

It was very detailed, and explained how the Yeti folklore came from Asia to the Western US.

It also was detailed about the british expeditions to the himalayas to search for the yeti.

__________________"I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker
"I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325
Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic

__________________"I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker
"I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325
Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic

I like reading Gian J. Quasar on Bigfoot. But beware. He replaces the standard Bigfootville narrative with his own even more fantastic ideas. He thinks Sasquatch is an anthropoid monkey. He links it to this hoax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Loys%27_Ape

Quasar thinks the humanlike Bigfoot tracks are fakes, while the Ruby Creek tracks are real. He sees those tracks as monkey-like (although giant), even though when Green took a tracing of a track to a zoologist he was told it was bear. Gian argues that the De Loys monkey (not ape) migrated out of South America northward.

Quasar also toys with the idea that the more human-like Sasquatch reports are relict Neanderthals, so we have two types of Sasquatch.

He is rational about the nonsense of the standard Bigfoot is Giganto narrative, but red hot for his own made up bunkum. An interesting, one of a kind fella.

I read the first part of the book where he blames Titmus for making Green believe that the Chapman track tracing was congruent with the Crew cast...that is a little hard to believe since Green visited Crew shortly after the Bigfoot story broke. Green could and should have seen for himself that they were different. Of course Meldrum thinks the Wallace prints and the Patterson tracks are both real and from the same Bigfoot.
I then skimmed through the second half where he tries to make sense of the worlds hominid legends etc and comes up with the giant monkey from South America!?

Richard Henry has died. He visited the film site with Jim McClarin a couple weeks after the claimed date of filming. In 2004 he visited Bluff Creek with Perez and drew a diagram of what he had seen in 1967. Oddly, Perez seems to have taken him to the wrong “film site,” a hundred or so yards downstream from the right spot.

__________________"Take the children, but LEAVE ME MY MONKEY!"
--Dewey Cox, in "Walk Hard: the Dewey Cox Story."
"The main skill of bigfoot investigators is finding ways to deny the obvious." --DFoot

Yeah, Roger said that they tracked Patty for 3.5 miles before losing her sign on pine needles. That would be a slow process to follow whatever sign was being left and might require dismounting numerous times or even doing the whole tracking event on foot while pulling your horse.

Maybe that lie was supposed to tie in with another lie told about Gimlin being a tracker with Indian ancestry. But then that partnership fell apart and the story didn't work out. The rather monumental tracking excursion bit got dumped from the already-inconsistent narrative. The timeline given doesn't even allow for the hours it would have taken to do the tracking trip and then still do everything else.

My attention was diverted for some months and I missed this post, of keen interest to me.

This was my explanation for why they had to immediately leave Bluff Creek after telling their story. The tracks don't match up with the story. People can ask questions with the tracks right in front of them. The tracks are going to show a flim scene with an actor, with the tracks ending where the film clip ends.

There aren't going to be horse tracks following bigfoot tracks, not even ten feet from the end of the Pattywalk, let alone 3.5 miles, lol. Bob Heironimus says they did hoax tracks after filming the PGF, but my God 3.5 miles of them including horses, no way.

John Green is the most important immediate target of the PGF. Rene Dahinden is a close second. Then you have the Canadian bigfoot guide, leader of an expedition that never happened (Dahinden) and the writer/publisher, the peddler of bigfoot pulp fiction (Green). Those two have alredy been working together for many years.

Jim McLaren was at Humboldt State as a student and aspiring bigfoot hunter, and Dahinden had relocated to Willow Creek as a now international bigfoot hunter. Those two went together to see the PGF.

Isn't that amazing, that they got the very front-line people from the immediate vicinity more than a full day's drive away! Got the hunters out of the forest just in time.

Lyle Laverty, forest service worker, gets there three days after the hoax, and neither Patterson nor Gimlin are around needing to explain any tracks. He seems to have relished his role as first-responder and adds his own signature to the hoax, so to speak. The tracks will completely disappear, the first responder has quite a bit of street cred in bigfoot world. Big incentive to lie for bigfoot.

I find it interesting that the PGF got very little interest from American and Canadian scientists, but that years later Dahinden was able to get up some interest in it in England and Russia.

First of all I don’t think the Russians had anything scientific to say. But it is my impression that Europeans have (in the past at least) had a rather romantic idea of North America, as a persistently wild and unexplored continent. This allows for the possibility of all sorts of large cryptids still undiscovered. In a way the same fantasy allows for the believers in this country to show aerial photos of trees as proof of Bigfoot habitat. So it is not so surprising to me that some English researchers decided to take the PGF seriously.

The elephant in the room for the believers of course is that every state and the feds have substantial wildlife departments whose job it is to find count track photograph protect and exploit animals, using every bit of scientific and tech equipment available. Not to mention our amazing universities and their faculties. Not to mention those who explore our lands for private commercial use and the immense amount of roadkill we generate.

__________________"Take the children, but LEAVE ME MY MONKEY!"
--Dewey Cox, in "Walk Hard: the Dewey Cox Story."
"The main skill of bigfoot investigators is finding ways to deny the obvious." --DFoot

But it is my impression that Europeans have (in the past at least) had a rather romantic idea of North America, as a persistently wild and unexplored continent. This allows for the possibility of all sorts of large cryptids still undiscovered.. ...

The major culprit in this later wave of evaluation was Don Grieve, who leaped to both a questionable opinion about Patty’s size and an untenable conclusion that Patty COULD NOT be a man in a suit if the frame speed was 16-18/sec. AND OF COURSE HE DIDNT SHOW HIS WORK on the latter. As a result his conclusions have been parroted by the rubes and con men for 40 some years. A RARE KUDO to Don Jeff for finally publishing enough information in SLMS to allow the less stupid to see what Grieve actually did.

__________________"Take the children, but LEAVE ME MY MONKEY!"
--Dewey Cox, in "Walk Hard: the Dewey Cox Story."
"The main skill of bigfoot investigators is finding ways to deny the obvious." --DFoot

$14.95 plus S and H gets you a sexy pic of that dreamboat Bob. Choice of three hunky cowboy poses. Autographed! Or pick up his bio on CD!!
“Bob Gimlin, the man, the myth, the legend. He has an incredible Bigfoot story to tell.
There will be several new updates, make sure you check back often to see what is new, you are NOT going to want to miss a thing!”
bobgimlindotnet...

__________________"Take the children, but LEAVE ME MY MONKEY!"
--Dewey Cox, in "Walk Hard: the Dewey Cox Story."
"The main skill of bigfoot investigators is finding ways to deny the obvious." --DFoot

My attention was diverted for some months and I missed this post, of keen interest to me.

This was my explanation for why they had to immediately leave Bluff Creek after telling their story. The tracks don't match up with the story. People can ask questions with the tracks right in front of them. The tracks are going to show a flim scene with an actor, with the tracks ending where the film clip ends.

There aren't going to be horse tracks following bigfoot tracks, not even ten feet from the end of the Pattywalk, let alone 3.5 miles, lol. Bob Heironimus says they did hoax tracks after filming the PGF, but my God 3.5 miles of them including horses, no way.

John Green is the most important immediate target of the PGF. Rene Dahinden is a close second. Then you have the Canadian bigfoot guide, leader of an expedition that never happened (Dahinden) and the writer/publisher, the peddler of bigfoot pulp fiction (Green). Those two have alredy been working together for many years.

Jim McLaren was at Humboldt State as a student and aspiring bigfoot hunter, and Dahinden had relocated to Willow Creek as a now international bigfoot hunter. Those two went together to see the PGF.

Isn't that amazing, that they got the very front-line people from the immediate vicinity more than a full day's drive away! Got the hunters out of the forest just in time.

Lyle Laverty, forest service worker, gets there three days after the hoax, and neither Patterson nor Gimlin are around needing to explain any tracks. He seems to have relished his role as first-responder and adds his own signature to the hoax, so to speak. The tracks will completely disappear, the first responder has quite a bit of street cred in bigfoot world. Big incentive to lie for bigfoot.

It's all such fascinating history.

The most unusual thing to me is the lack of response to the site by the footers of the day.

Laverty just happened to be there, otherwise, basically no one went to the site to check out the story, or even just to document it, or to try to get on Patty's trail, etc.

If you believe the story, wouldn't you want to get out there pronto?

Titmus does get there, but not for a week or so, and he has trouble finding the exact spot. And he apparently doesn't bother to bring a camera, even though he's going to the holy grail site.

The site is basically ignored by footers, who had no problem getting out to see the movie Roger was showing.

Months go by before anyone tries to document the site properly.

It's a very ho-hum attitude, imo.

The only reason I can think for the behavior is that Roger was a known con-man, and the suspicion was too high for actual belief in Roger's story and movie.

Patterson and Gimlin show little interest in getting back to the area for another try.

__________________What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing.

None of the footers doubted the story. They believed Patterson completely even before they saw the film. The only reason that Green went there and got the measurements the next year was to try to determine exactly how big Patty was. Dahinden and Byrne went there to get photos and measurements in the 7O’s only after the film was about to die for lack of interest. There was never an attempt to really investigate the film. What data they collected they were incompetent to analyze.
Still true 50 years later.
Rinse and repeat...

__________________"Take the children, but LEAVE ME MY MONKEY!"
--Dewey Cox, in "Walk Hard: the Dewey Cox Story."
"The main skill of bigfoot investigators is finding ways to deny the obvious." --DFoot

Dahinden somehow got from SF to Willow Creek in 12 hours at night without a car!!
He left Willow Creek when he had no way to get to the film site, didn’t know where it was, and Roger was leaving, promising him a look at the film in Yakima. McClarin went with him.
Green was hundreds of miles away and had no money or support and had already been to Bluff Creek twice that fall. Titmus was poorer than any of them and he was also in B.C. He came after going to the showing and almost couldn’t find the spot. McClarin came also a few days later. He was a penniless student without a vehicle.
The idea that measurements and photos might matter was beyond their pay grade. They “knew” Patterson already had the necessary data. Some didn’t even have cameras. Titmus did some casts. Looked around and pretended to be an expert tracker (which everyone knew he wasn’t) and brought in his nonexpert brother in law to walk up and down.
These people were dopes and committed cultists.

__________________"Take the children, but LEAVE ME MY MONKEY!"
--Dewey Cox, in "Walk Hard: the Dewey Cox Story."
"The main skill of bigfoot investigators is finding ways to deny the obvious." --DFoot

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.